Parent Cortical Mass

PCM's Top Articles of the Week

The hot topic this week was Universal Pre-K, (a PCM Top 10 Education Policy), put forward by the President in the SOTU. The question: Is Pre-K worth the cost? Hear from James Heckman, the Nobel laureate in economics whose bedrock research the President mentioned, Fareed Zakaria, and Ellen Galinsky, a work and family scholar. ● Get familiar with research findings issued this week on early exposure to math concepts, educational TV, and GPA. ● Read current information about bullying, how confusion aids learning, testing into gifted programs, and schools’ hypersensitive reactions to kids faking gunplay. ● Don’t miss the video of the amazing 3D doodling pen.

Parenting

What the Heck is Your Kid's Teacher Talking About? The Glossary - Emma Brown, WashPost

Bullying, Can We Teach Kids Not to Be Bystanders? - Emily Bazelon, Slate

Schools Wrangle with Tolerance for Kids Faking Gunplay - Michael Rubinkam, AP, USA Today

From 'Flipped Classrooms' to Flipped Households - Anne Collier, NetFamilyNews

Don't Rule Out Having Children Because You Want a Career - Anne-Marie Slaughter, The Atlantic

Helicopter Parenting and Kid's Self-Image - Rick Nauert, PhD, PsycCentral

Learning

Early Exposure to Math Concepts Is Vital to Avoid Innumeracy - Celia Baker, Deseret News

Hanging Out with Smart Students Ups GPA - Karen Hopkin, Scientific American

What Predicts College GPA? - Daniel Willingham, Science and Education Blog

Why Feeling Confused Will Help You Learn Better - Annie Murphy Paul, Brilliant Blog

3-Year Olds Know Better Than You Give Credit - Christie Nicholson, Scientific American

What Do Educational TV Shows Really Teach Preschoolers? - ScienceDaily

Education

Schools Ask: Gifted or Well-Prepared? - Jenny Anderson, New York Times

How Charters Get the Students They Want - Stephanie Simon, Reuters

Equal Opportunity, Our National Myth - Joseph E. Stiglitz, New York Times

Beat Inequality with Preschool - Fareed Zakaria, CNN

Preschool for All: Getting It Right - Ellen Galinsky, Huffington Post

James Heckman, Nobel laureate in Econ, on Preschool Research - Christina Samuels, Ed Week

Laura Bush Pursues Ambitious Education Agenda - Peter Meyer, Education Next

Sal Khan on His Famous Online Academy - Valerie Strauss, Washington Post

Interview with Daniel Pink: Teachers as Persuaders - Larry Ferlazzo, Education Week

Resources

2012 Cybils Book Awards Announced! - Cybils.com

2012 Cybils App Awards Announced! - Carisa Kluver, Digital Media Diet

Toy Fair 2013: What's New in Lego - Amy Craft, GeekMom

Oscar Week: 7 Resources on Film Literacy - Matt Davis, edutopia

New Picture Books I'm Loving - Melissa Taylor, Imagination Soup

3D Doodling Pen Lets You Draw Objects [1 min. Video] - NewScientist

Free Kits Help 10-Year-Olds See Their DNA - Helene Brazier-Mitouart, Scientific American

PCM's Top Articles of the Week

This week a smart discussion over introverted students and class participation evolved around posts by a teacher, a wrongologist, and an introversion expert. ● Last week’s top article on how kids handle the pressures of accountability testing generated posts this week on how to help ‘worriers’ overcome test anxiety. ● President Obama’s SOTU tackled universal Pre-K (one of PCM's Top 10 Education Policies) and the global achievement gap. ● Do you have a strong opinion about how best to educate young children? Then the debate over whether the common core undermines early learning will interest you. ● Experts dispute if background knowledge is essential, elitist, or extraneous in the age of Google. ● Check out the fantastic new toys showcased at NYC’s annual Toy Fair.

Parenting

Introverted Kids Need to Learn to Speak Up at School - Jessica Lahey, The Atlantic

Help Shy Kids, Don't Punish Them - Susan Cain, The Atlantic

Why Introverts Shouldn't Be Forced to Talk in Class - Katherine Schultz, Washington Post

A Parent Guide to Dealing with Digital Behavior Issues - Edward Chen, Edutopia

How Parents Who Play Favorites Hurt the Entire Family - Olivia B. Waxman, Time

Don't Be Bossy When Playing with Your Kids - Richard Rende, PhD, RedHotParenting

Is 'Parent Involvement' in Schools Really Useful? - Alfie Kohn, SmartBlog on Education

17 Parenting Lessons from Downton Abbey - Lisa Endlich, Huffington Post

Learning

Is the Internet Good or Bad for Your Brain? - Alvaro Fernandez, Wired

Helping a Worrier Become a Warrior - KJ Dell'Antonia, New York Times

Anxious About Tests? Tips to Ease Angst - Annie Murphy Paul, Mind/Shift

Feeling Anxious? Think Again - Wray Herbert, Huffington Post

Children Must Learn More Words, Studies Say - Sarah D. Sparks, Education Week

Education

Obama Urges Big Preschool Expansion in SOTU - Alyson Klein, Politics K-12

We Must Out-Educate and Out-Innovate Other Nations - Diane Ravitch, Bill Moyers' Group Think

The Push to Gauge Bang for Buck From College - Ruth Simon and Michael Corkery, WSJ

Michael Gove Trashes Elitist 'Downtown Abbey' Ed Attitudes - R A Johnston, Education News

Knowledge Matters, Students Can't Google Everything - Daniel Willingham, Washington Post

A Real Paradigm Shift in Education - Marion Brady, Washington Post

Do Young Kids Need to Learn a Lot of Facts? - E. Miller and N. Carlsson-Paige, Washington Post

Common Core v False Promise of Leveled Literacy - Kathleen Porter-Magee, Fordham Institute

Resources

10 Best Toys from Toy Fair 2013 - Corinne Iozzio and Amber Williams, PopSci

Q&A with Pamela Druckerman on Her New French Parenting Book - KJ Dell'Antonia, NYT

'College Scoreboard' Launches for Parents and Students - Arne Duncan, Dept of Education

3 Vocabulary Apps for SAT Takers and Lifelong Learners - Katie Lepi, edudemic

Delorme and the World's Largest Scale Replica of Earth - Sarah Pinault, GeekMom

Common Core Standards: Basics for Parents [3-min animation]

The Council of the Great City Schools, a national organization composed of 67 large city school districts, produced this 3 minute animation to explain the basics of the Common Core State Standards, one of PCM's Top 10 Education Policies.

"Is a girl in your neighborhood being taught as much as her friend in the next one? Is a graduating senior from, say, St. Louis as prepared to get a job as a graduate from Shanghai? As it turns out, the answer to both these questions is "No."

For parents who want to know more about specific topics covered in the common core, CGCS developed these "Parent Roadmaps." They offer K-8 grade-by-grade examples from both Math and English Language Arts standards.

What is the 'Parent Trigger'?

Parent Trigger describes state legislation that gives parents more power to change poorly performing schools. To pull the trigger, more than 50% of the parents in the school must sign a petition to initiate the process. Once the shot is fired, parents can implement one of 4 options:

    1) shut down the school,

    2) fire the principal,

    3) fire teachers, or

    4) hire a charter organization to take over the school.

Seven states have passed laws with versions of the parent trigger. But Florida, in March 2012, voted down parent trigger legislation in a hard fought battle between activists on both sides. As many as 20 more states are considering legislation. Why? One reason is that it improves states’ chances of being waived from certain accountability requirements in No Child Left Behind.

Here are 14 articles to help you get informed. 

Reference Articles

Hopes and Fears for Parent Trigger Laws - Room for Debate, The Opinion Pages, NYT

Five Minute Primer: Parent Trigger Laws - Donna Krache, Schools of Thought, CNN

Parent Trigger Laws in the States - National Conference of State Legislatures

Roundup of Leading Thinkers on Parent Trigger - Nick Pandolfo, HechingerEd

Opinions

Can Parents Take Over Schools? - Andrew Rotherham, Time

Putting Parents in Charge - Peg Tyre, New York Times

The Trouble With the Parent Trigger - Diane Ravitch, Education Week

Not Your Mother's PTA - Bruno V. Manno, Education Next

Support Parent Power - Gloria Romero, Los Angeles Times

No Magic Bullet for Schools - Editorial, Los Angeles Times

Why Florida's Parent Trigger Bill Failed in State Senate - Valerie Strauss, Washington Post

Michelle Rhee Interview About the Parent Trigger - Jeff Solochek, Tampa Bay Times

US Mayors Back Parent Trigger Legislation - Stephanie Simon, Reuters

Mayors Gone Mad - Diane Ravitch, Diane Ravitch's Blog

What is the 'Parent Trigger'?

Parent Trigger describes state legislation that gives parents more power to change poorly performing schools. To pull the trigger, more than 50% of the parents in the school must sign a petition to initiate the process. Once the shot is fired, parents can implement one of 4 options:

    1) shut down the school,

    2) fire the principal,

    3) fire teachers, or

    4) hire a charter organization to take over the school.

Seven states have passed laws with versions of the parent trigger. But Florida, in March 2012, voted down parent trigger legislation in a hard fought battle between activists on both sides. As many as 20 more states are considering legislation. Why? One reason is that it improves states’ chances of being waived from certain accountability requirements in No Child Left Behind.

Here are 14 articles to help you get informed. 

Reference Articles

Hopes and Fears for Parent Trigger Laws - Room for Debate, The Opinion Pages, NYT

Five Minute Primer: Parent Trigger Laws - Donna Krache, Schools of Thought, CNN

Parent Trigger Laws in the States - National Conference of State Legislatures

Roundup of Leading Thinkers on Parent Trigger - Nick Pandolfo, HechingerEd

Opinions

Can Parents Take Over Schools? - Andrew Rotherham, Time

Putting Parents in Charge - Peg Tyre, New York Times

The Trouble With the Parent Trigger - Diane Ravitch, Education Week

Not Your Mother's PTA - Bruno V. Manno, Education Next

Support Parent Power - Gloria Romero, Los Angeles Times

No Magic Bullet for Schools - Editorial, Los Angeles Times

Why Florida's Parent Trigger Bill Failed in State Senate - Valerie Strauss, Washington Post

Michelle Rhee Interview About the Parent Trigger - Jeff Solochek, Tampa Bay Times

US Mayors Back Parent Trigger Legislation - Stephanie Simon, Reuters

Mayors Gone Mad - Diane Ravitch, Diane Ravitch's Blog

Two Poles of Ed Reform: Linda Darling-Hammond and Gov. Chris Christie

At the Iowa Education Summit this past Monday (available live stream,) we first heard Linda Darling-Hammond advise on the best ways to improve Iowa schools.  Moments after her speech, we heard Gov. Chris Christie do the same.  Their message and tone couldn't have been more different. 

Linda Darling-Hammond made her slide-by-slide case for education reform, compiling a stack of research for what works and doesn’t work to improve student achievement. America, she said, must increase the effectiveness of teachers with a specific set of evidence-backed reforms.  These include improving recruitment, training programs, mentoring, “job embedded” professional development, collaborative accountability and teacher evaluation systems.  Additionally, she advocated using formative assessments, which target feedback to learners, saying they will help close achievement gaps. 

During her speech she had some straight talk for educators about turnaround schools.  Turnarounds were not something educators had much expertise in, she said, whereas in the business community, broader pools of turnaround experts were available, which the education community could tap.  To take charge of a turnaround, "You have to love stress," she said.

She used a "persuade and persist" strategy to advocate for change--persuade policymakers and the business community with persistent exposure to current research.  In contrast, corporate reformers fight for change with what she called "shame and blame."   "It's a strategy," she acknowledged.

Gov. Chris Christie, providing the very example of the shame and blame strategy used by the "no excuses" education reform community, grabbed the audience of teachers and state politicians with moral muscle.  In the first 10 minutes of his address he used the word "failure" as many times as can be said and still speak in full sentences.   His strategy was to shame educators and policy makers to hold themselves accountable for higher student achievement, and to blame all for "failure factories," the phrase he used for worst performing schools.  He did, however, start his speech saying reformers of all stripes need to focus on what unites us, and not demonize one another. 

He used sticks.  She used carrots.  He used bold, negative rhetoric.  She used science and work-ethic hope.  He said money was short and educators needed to face harsh realities.  She said to fix the school system would take a national investment and a more equitable distribution of resources.  He was a fiery politician.  She was a politically saavy academic.

David Driscoll, former Massachusetts Education Commissioner, spoke later in the Summit program.  To describe his position on education reform, he said, "Take Linda Darling-Hammond on one pole, and Gov. Christie on the other pole; I'm somewhere in the middle, as are a lot of us."

Ravitch on "Corporate Education Reforms"

Diane Ravitch, a PCM Top 10 Influencer, uses the term "Corporate Education Reforms" to describe the kind of reforms that control today's education policies. In this 9-minute video she outlines and debunks corporate-based reforms and lists her top three preferred reforms.  Her book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, is a PCM Top 10 Book for Parents.

 

What is Accountability in Education Policy?

Accountability policies assert that taxpayers shouldn’t just fund programs; they should get great results for their tax dollars. 

In education policy today, accountability means that schools, not just the students, should be held accountable for the progress, or lack of progress, in every student's achievement. 

How did Accountability in Education Policy Become Important?

Accountability in education emerged during the early 1990s at the state level. Governors figured out that excellent schools were necessary to attract new business, so they started expecting schools to deliver great results. 

Few have problems with the idea of accountability.  They do have problems when accountability systems are so poorly designed they obstruct progress.  

An education accountability system requires three things, 1) a clearly defined set of standards, 2) valid and reliable tests that measure how well the standards are met, and 3) an effective plan to improve schools that fall short.  Throughout the 90s states strived to get these three things right. The federal government was not involved. 

But in 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act changed everything.  Instead of no federal benchmark for student achievement, the new law set an almost utopian national goal--that every student be "proficient" in reading and math by 2014.  To hold schools accountable to that goal, every school was required to make "Adequate Yearly Progress” or face serious punitive consequences. 

Standardized Test Scores Became the Measure of Accountability

How was adequate yearly progress (AYP) measured?  The law required states to test third through eighth graders in reading and math every year. States were responsible for developing their own standards, tests and annual expectations of progress.  But every state had the same end goal--all students must score at a proficient level by 2014. 

The law set the expectation that every child, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, or socioeconomic status, make annual progress.  To make their progress more transparent, the law required the disaggregation of test scores, so a lack of progress in a group couldn’t be disguised by school wide averages. 

If schools failed to meet AYP they faced a series of increasingly punitive measures over a period of six years.  At first, parents could remove their children from a failing school and enroll them in a better school.  But years of failing would lead to firing some or all of the school staff, or even closing down the school.

The Unintended Consequences of High Stakes Testing

With harsh sanctions for failing to meet standards, and no rewards for meeting or exceeding them, NCLB's accountability system led to unintended negative consequences such as lowering standards, narrowing curriculum, teaching to the test, and gaming the system.

Because states lost federal funds if their schools failed to meet standards, NCLB actually incentivized states to lower standards.  The law even created disincentives to high standards, since there was only a downside to doing so. During this NCLB era, almost half the states actually lowered their standards. 

By testing just reading and math, NCLB unintentionally incentivized schools to narrow the curriculum to make more time to teach the accountable subjects.  To lawmakers, more class time for reading and math seemed smart, but that also meant less time for science, social studies, and P.E.  This obstructed federal goals to expand science education and reduce childhood obesity. 

Since standardized tests scores determined success or failure, teaching test taking skills became a success strategy.  Hours of instruction time shifted from subject matter to test preparation, further narrowing the curriculum. 

Standardized tests aren’t designed to measure teaching effectiveness, so many educators said it was unfair to tie their reputation and job security to these test scores.  Many didn’t "buy in" and this led to "gaming the system."  For example, students likely to score low might be encouraged to stay home on testing day. States might lower the “cut score” to raise the pass rate.  Worse yet, instances of cheating were exposed.

What Good Came From NCLB's Accountability System?

Most agree that good will come from the enormous amount of data produced with ten years of testing.   Researchers say that the requirement to disaggregate test scores has provided essential information to understand and overcome achievement gaps.  Most importantly, the law’s accountability system gets credit for focusing the attention of all K-12 stakeholders squarely on student achievement.

 

Additional Resources:

Has accountability improved student achievement?  This question is hotly debated.  

The case against current accountability polices is well-stated by Diane Ravitch in her book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, Chapter 8.  

The case for the positive effects of accountability is well made in this Harvard Report by Kress, Zechmann, and Schmitten (pdf).  

For a discussion of what a smart accountability system might look like, read The Flat World of Education, Chapter 9, by Linda Hammond-Darling.

-- Go to PCM's Top 10 Education Policies List --

What is No Child Left Behind?

“No Child Left Behind” is the name of the current federal law regulating K-12 public education.  It passed in 2001 with overwhelming bi-partisan support, and was the sixth reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.

Two Achievement Gaps

NCLB set a bold new direction for federal government funding of public education.  For the first time federal law held states strictly accountable to deliver higher student achievement in their public schools.  Congress made it clear that despite billions in federal spending, an unacceptable achievement gap persisted between low-income and affluent students and between white and minority students.  Furthermore, the gap between America and top-ranking nations on international test scores was not closing.  NCLB was enacted to close these gaps.

Accountability

To fulfill America’s promise of access to an equal education, and to close America’s global achievement gap, NCLB established an unprecedented accountability system.  All public schools were required to make “Adequate Yearly Progress” on benchmarks of student achievement, and to publish an annual report card on each school’s progress, or lack of progress.   

 Schools that fell short of adequate yearly progress would be labeled “failing” and would face increasing punitive measures.  If a school was failing, Congress gave parents the choice to remove their children from the school and send them to more successful schools.  Putting “choice” into the school system, it was argued, forced schools to improve student outcomes or risk losing them to better performing schools.  To give parents even more choices, NCLB increased opportunities for qualified organizations to start charter schools.

State Standards and Tests

NCLB required each state to create high standards for reading and math curriculum and to develop tests to measure if students achieved those standards at a basic, proficient, or advanced level. 

Implausibly, the law mandated that all students in America score at the proficient level in both math and reading by 2014.  They reasoned if not all children, then some would be left behind.

Highly Qualified Teachers

In addition to requiring higher standards, new assessments, annual testing, Adequate Yearly Progress, and choice, NCLB also mandated that every student have a “Highly Qualified Teacher” in every math and reading classroom.  Because low performing schools were more likely to be staffed with uncertified teachers, the law intended to rectify that inequality of access to effective teachers.

Why is NCLB So Poorly Regarded?

Over the ten years NCLB has been in effect, accountability and choice have undoubtedly increased, but these measures did not produce the levels of improvement in student achievement Congress believed would result.  Over the years it became clear that some of NCLB provisions actually created perverse incentives that caused teaching to the test, encouraged cutting back arts and history, led to cheating scandals, and in some cases even motivated states to actually lower their academic standards.  

Educators point to the mandate that all students be proficient by 2014 as evidence that legislators were naively out of touch with the complex realities teachers face in classrooms every day.

When NCLB is Reauthorized Will These Problems Be Fixed?

Though NCLB’s accountability system didn’t close the achievement gaps as hoped, it has produced massive amounts of valuable test data and pockets of success that will inform efforts going forward.  By now, all politicians agree that NCLB needs to be fixed.  Of course, they don’t all agree on the best way to fix it.

In his 2011 State of the Union speech, President Obama made investment in American education a priority.  Senate leaders announced plans to move reauthorization of NCLB through the Senate by the end of summer.   There is bi-partisan support to fix the bill, and debate about how to fix it is expected to start in early summer.

Rep. George Miller, a drafter of the 2001 bill, called No Child Left Behind the “most tainted brand in America.” Because most legislators agree with him, expect the reauthorization to get a new name.

 

Additional Resources:

To learn about the pros and cons of NCLB’s policies, check out the five education books listed on PCM’s Top 10 Books for Parents:  Whatever It Takes, The Knowledge Deficit, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, Disrupting Class, and The Flat World of Education.

To read a concise statement of the Obama Administration plans for fixing NCLB, read Sec. Duncan’s statement given at the Senate Committee Hearing on the Reauthorization of NCLB in March 2010.  Or, view Duncan’s 45-minute testimony in its entirety.

For non-partisan citizen information on NCLB, see Public Education Network’s “Everything You Wanted to Know About NCLB.”

-- Go to PCM's Top 10 Education Policies List --